Med anledning av mötesprotokollets per 20130626 omfattning
https://www.dfri.se/dfri/motesprotokoll/5-20130626/ önskar jag
särskilt lyfta fram punkt 10 genom att förmedla följande dialog
mellan Philip Luppens (programmerare AT4AM Core Toolkit) och Nicolas
Pettiaux (drivkraft RMLL):|
-------- Original Message --------
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Nicolas Pettiaux wrote:
2013/6/27 Philip Luppens:
Any feedback is welcome. Due to the nature of the project, the assumed adopters are not exactly known for being a) very vocal nor b) very quick in their adoption. We're low on resources, but we aim high - even if just to develop a vision that can be shared for the future.
It's perfectly possible to run your own instance of AT4AM, backed by for example a PostgreSQL database (which is what I'm running locally). The instances on at4am.org, however, are backed by an in-memory database, so whenever we do a (nightly) deployment, the backend is wiped clean.
Now, I have been thinking (a lot) about federation & importing of trusted content, but until we can convince the EP to share its published proposals in a more open format (preferably in Akoma Ntoso (AN)), this will be limited to those source text that are converted (semi)-manually. Afaik, the AN transformation in the EP is not yet entirely into place, and the existing XML schema in use is too limited and would prove quite challenging to transform automatically (of course, once again Italy shows us how it's done by providing pretty much all their documents in AN).
Well, at this moment we seem to have some interest coming from Italy. I'm not familiar at all with the procedures nor the way of amending or drafting in any of the aforementioned countries, but I do believe the core is flexible enough to handle those cases as well. The only problem is the availability of source texts ...
I'm not entirely sure what would be of interest to those attending the workshop; we do aim to provide in time (given enough resources), a full turn-key parliamentary solution (drafting, marking, amending, voting, consolidating, ... ), but this will remain a distant dream until we get more backing.
There's also the difference in target audience: we aim to provide governments and large organisations with these tools, but they might just as well be used to improve legislation by allowing citizens to participate actively, and even for lobbyists to make their lives easier (although no-one wants to admit that publicly, of course).
Anything related to AT4AM is considered a step forward, so yes, if possible, try to raise the topic.
It will become more and more important as more people want to participate in the making of laws, as they demand more transparency and insight into the legislative processes, and as they demand a more streamlined and cost-effective government. Our tool is but once tiny building block in getting governments to adopt a new strategy and to migrate away from closed source & proprietary formats (I do start to sound like a political activist now, don't I? *sigh*).
I'm assuming he will. And 'paperless'. Or 'papersmart', as our friends from the UN so eloquently put it.
"We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand." - Randy Pausch